It is known that generally the definite article is not used with names of people. However, when the names are preceded by names of occupations then, as some sources say there must be used "the". For example: "The psychologist Mike Smith is going to deliver a speech." But some English speakers say that the article should be omitted. For instance: "Author Conor MacGregor is coming on" not "the author Conor MacGregor is coming on." So, could anyone tell me what variant is grammatical to use with "the" or without?
Learn English – The definite article with names of people and their professions
articles
Related Solutions
AmEng speakers do NOT use definite articles all the time; whether we do or not depends on what we want to say, and how we want to sound saying it. In particular, the use of the definite article with the present tense of the verb "to be" depends (in the words of a famous American) on what your definition of "is" is. Several of your example sentences sound distinctly unnatural to my USAite ear. Here are my suggestions based on my own usage:
School:
- He is in school. - He is a student; specific time does not matter. Perhaps it's Friday night and he's partying right now.
- He is in the school. - This does not sound natural at all to an American ear.
- He is enrolled in the school. - He is a student.
- He is at school. - He might be a student OR a teacher, but he is on the premises at this moment.
- He is at the school. - "The school" is a local landmark, and he's there right now.
Hospital:
He is in hospital. - He's an inpatient. This is valid, but not usual American usage. Anglophiles (Americans who like to drop Briticisms into their speech to appear more sophisticated) will sometimes use this.
He is in the hospital. - He's an inpatient.
He is at hospital. - We don't say this.
He is at the hospital. - He might be an outpatient, or he might work there; either way, he's there right now.
Church:
He is in church. - Services are in progress right now, and he's there.
He is at church. - Interchangeable with "in church".
He is in the church. - He's inside the building; no information is conveyed about what he's doing there (he might be polishing the floor, for example.)
He is at the church. - He's on the church grounds, not necessarily inside the sanctuary.
University/ College:
He is in university. - Americans don't usually say "in university"; "in college", however, means that he's a student.
He is enrolled in university. - He's a student.
He is at university. - He's a student. This is much more common than "in university", for some reason.
He is in the university. - Again, we don't say this.
He is at the university. - The university is a local landmark and he's there now. (Who is he - student, professor, tourist? Not enough information.)
Prison:
He is in prison. - He's a prisoner.
He is at prison. - We don't say this.
He is in the prison. - He's inside the building. He might be a prisoner, a warden, a visitor...
He is at the prison. - He's on the grounds, not necessarily inside the building - he might be waiting in the car while his wife visits her brother.
One thing this depends upon is whether the products in question are singular or plural.
For example, if you own just one tupperware cup, you might ask a member of your family to hand you 'the tupperware cup'. But if you have many you might say 'please hand me a tupperware cup'.
Presumably there is only one 'Hello toolbar'. Therefore it would make no sense to talk about 'a Hello toolbar' since there is only one. It would be 'the Hello Toolbar'.
Best Answer
Your sources are correct; it should be: "The psychologist Mike Smith is going to deliver a speech."
Although using the definite article in this case sometimes sounds odd to American ears, when it is not a real title you should include it. This has to do with the concept of "false title". You can use the "Good morning" test, to determine the correct usage:
The first one is okay, because "Doctor" is a real title; thus "Doctor Smith" does not require the definite article (indeed, must not have it). The second one, although acceptable to some, especially in AE, is not correct, because "pscyhologist" is a false title.
Linguists call this an anarthrous occupational nominal premodifier. The best analysis of this is by Greg Pullum at Language Log (2004-11-07).